But it's not a front court player or a power forward that I sense we need as much as someone who can make something happen in a slow down offense.

Ford makes us drastically better in this area. But I don't see our offense being stellar with just Ford penetrating and either scoring or kicking it out to our wings to shoot a three.

We need one more player who can make something happen from scratch. JO was somewhat of an option for us in that way, except he just wasn't very good at it. Artest was the player who did that for us when we won 61 games.

I like Shawne at the 4 to help this problem, but unless he develops more skills, he's not the answer. Same with Danny. I expect to see more of Quis than some of you are thinking because of this need for someone else to create.

If Ford goes down, we really suffer.

I'm looking forward to see what Rush can do, but most reports I've heard don't have him as a creator as much as a catch and shoot kind of guy. If Bayless turns out to be a creator-type, I may find myself regretting this trade eventually. However, I like it so far. I just think we may have wing redundancy and need to trade someone to get another initiator for the offense.
I don't know who else we can go after to solve this problem, but I'd like to hear some ideas.

LG33

06-29-2008, 09:20 PM

...Tinsley...?

:uhoh2:

jeffg-body

06-29-2008, 09:41 PM

I think Danny is developing in that role msyelf. He may not be the clear cut #1 guy on a good team, but he is our guy right now. Maybe B. Rush can develop that down the road a few years.

Ownagedood

06-29-2008, 09:49 PM

I think Danny is developing in that role msyelf. He may not be the clear cut #1 guy on a good team, but he is our guy right now. Maybe B. Rush can develop that down the road a few years.
I agree, Danny is slowly getting better and more aggressive.. Once he gets better at dribbling he will be a stud at creating plays.

Tyrion

06-29-2008, 09:51 PM

We now have several bigs willing to set screens for a change. I don't think this will be as much of an issue as it was in the past.

Ownagedood

06-29-2008, 10:00 PM

We now have several bigs willing to set screens for a change. I don't think this will be as much of an issue as it was in the past.
Ya, thats a good point.. But we don't know if we are good at screen plays yet because we really have never done them.. But I think we should use some in practice to try it out and see if it does work good for us. I think it would work really well with Dunleavy, maybe Granger, and probably Graham if he gets minutes.

That brings up another thought... Graham is actually a pretty good creator.. He just never gets the minutes.

Anthem

06-29-2008, 10:20 PM

We need one more player who can make something happen from scratch. JO was somewhat of an option for us in that way, except he just wasn't very good at it.
I've got to disagree with this. Jermaine was TERRIBLE at this. I love Jermaine, but that's not where he's best. In a one-possession game, it's too easy to collapse on the big man, give little fouls, etc. When you have to get one bucket, everybody in the NBA goes with a perimeter player.

Danny's developing this, which is good. We need it.

McKeyFan

06-29-2008, 10:33 PM

I've got to disagree with this. Jermaine was TERRIBLE at this. I love Jermaine, but that's not where he's best. In a one-possession game, it's too easy to collapse on the big man, give little fouls, etc. When you have to get one bucket, everybody in the NBA goes with a perimeter player.

I can go with that.

Sadly, the Pacers often went to Jermaine in these situations.

Young

06-29-2008, 10:35 PM

Someone who can create is always nice.

But not including point guards, who is out there that we can get?

I think someone who can make something happen from scratch is very difficult to find. What we need is another offensive weapon, perferably someone who attracts a double team.

Mike and Danny are the only guys on this team who can get 15+ a night. Shawne has the potential to do that for us. I like his game I think he just needs consistant game time. The real problem with him seems to be off the court issues which may have Larry sending him packing somewhere else.

I don't think the Pacers have many opitions right now to help with this problem. TJ will create for others but he won't score a lot himself. We need a third scorer on this team and it has to be a big man.

Slick Pinkham

06-29-2008, 10:38 PM

We need someone who can draw a double team.

It doesn't have to be a PF or C, but it does have to be someone who can post up or be enough of a threat even facing up that the D hedges for him. Someone with a devastating mid-range game if not a lot of low post moves.

Danny could get there, but he's not there yet.

Ike had the scoring skills to draw a double team on the blocks but lacked awareness or passing skills to dish it out of the double team, so his skills were wasted (i.e. double teaming him was effective because he could never exploit it).

Face it, we will be a pick-n-pop team relying on jumpers and exploiting mismatches caused by TJ's penetration, pick and rolls, and screens.

We have nobody for whom the opposing coach says "If he catches it there, then double-team him immediately"

That would be nice, but I'll settle for entertaining basketball, guarding the dribble penetration, being aggressive, and getting to 0.500 or thereabouts.

Hicks

06-29-2008, 10:44 PM

If things go our way, I think Danny and Brandon will be our creators.

McKeyFan

06-29-2008, 10:45 PM

Face it, we will be a pick-n-pop team relying on jumpers and exploiting mismatches caused by TJ's penetration, pick and rolls, and screens.

We have nobody for whom the opposing coach says "If he catches it there, then double-team him immediately"

Yeah, sounds spot on.

Sure wish we could find a way, though.

P.S. With a bunch of strong character guys now, and if we ship Shawne, Quis, and Tinsley, maybe we could pick up Zach Randolph. He'd draw a double team.

Hicks

06-29-2008, 10:48 PM

And he'd also destroy our motto of "Strong character".

Gamble1

06-29-2008, 11:00 PM

So here is a question for you. Who on the Pistons can create for themselves besides Billups?

I really don't think having a star that draws a double team is essential at this point. On the other hand if we can get everyone to play with in their game then I believe we will have a team that can compete in the East.

To answer the question who can create beside Ford I also would say Granger and Quis. Personally I hate seeing isolation plays any way.

McKeyFan

06-29-2008, 11:14 PM

So here is a question for you. Who on the Pistons can create for themselves besides Billups?

Well, I think Rasheed and Prince are better at it than anyone on our team (besides T.J Ford).

Infinite MAN_force

06-29-2008, 11:20 PM

I have a question.

Who was that guy on the 90s pacers teams?

Reggie wasn't known for creating his own shot, he ran around and utilized screens to get open. Rush has a very similar game.

I also think Hibbert will play a somewhat "smits" like role for us. There are your two leading scorers on the old team.

Not saying these guys are as talented as their counterparts, but I disagree that you absolutley have to have that iso guy to be succesful in crunch time.

Hicks

06-29-2008, 11:29 PM

Most teams prefer to iso down the stretch, which frankly baffles me in most cases. I always liked how the Pacers would run a play for Reggie (mostly) or someone else (occasionally) to get them a good look, rather than just give them the ball and say "Go get 'em."

CableKC

06-29-2008, 11:34 PM

If Bayless turns out to be a creator-type, I may find myself regretting this trade eventually. However, I like it so far. I just think we may have wing redundancy and need to trade someone to get another initiator for the offense.
I thought I read that Bayless is a pretty good creator for himself and others.

McKeyFan

06-29-2008, 11:35 PM

I have a question.

Who was that guy on the 90s pacers teams?

Reggie wasn't known for creating his own shot, he ran around and utilized screens to get open. Rush has a very similar game.

I also think Hibbert will play a somewhat "smits" like role for us. There are your two leading scorers on the old team.

Not saying these guys are as talented as their counterparts, but I disagree that you absolutley have to have that iso guy to be succesful in crunch time.

You could argue that Smits was able to create a shot more easily than Reggie.

Also, during some games (I'm thinking specifically of the ECF against the Bulls), the goto guy at the end of games for us was Travis Best, who could definitely create his own shot.

Reggie was great at hitting an open shot at the end of games. He was especially good at throwing up a desperation three when it was needed, often hitting it. But I'm not so sure he was the best guy to create a high percentage shot when you only needed a two.

But, back to the point of the thread, I would agree that we don't need another creator or guy who draws double teams if we can run a team oriented offense like in the late 90s. But we need, in that case, a Mark Jackson passer and a Dale Davis pick setter. And a great coach.

Infinite MAN_force

06-29-2008, 11:43 PM

Well TJ Ford is kinda like Best with the passing ability of a true PG like jax, so thats a start. :D

I think Larry is definatly trying to build a team in the image of that old team... He is getting pieces that fit together really well. I like it. He has targeted a lot of high B-Ball IQ players for one thing.

wintermute

06-30-2008, 12:18 AM

according to some portland fans, jarrett jack played the travis best 4th quarter role for them. but his results weren't always good... not unlike travis :D

Shade

06-30-2008, 01:20 AM

We actually had a "go-to guy who can create."

For about an hour.

avoidingtheclowns

06-30-2008, 09:38 AM

We actually had a "go-to guy who can create."

For about an hour.

a go-to guy who disappeared against West Virginia in the tourney and relied on chase buddinger to do most of the shooting/scoring?

Putnam

06-30-2008, 10:01 AM

We actually had a "go-to guy who can create."

For about an hour.

Years from now, Jerryd Bayless is going to be a trivia question. His name will be remembered along with other short-term Pacers such as Eric Piatkowski and Gerald Paddio. (Who else was a Pacer for a day or less?)

Go-to guy? Nah. We're going to play team basketball. The other teams are not going to know who will get the call at crunch time. The "creating" is going to happen in the huddle during the time-out -- not on the floor with the clock ticking away.

rexnom

06-30-2008, 10:11 AM

a go-to guy who disappeared against West Virginia in the tourney and relied on chase buddinger to do most of the shooting/scoring?
Seriously. What happened to Bayless in the tourney?

Justin Tyme

06-30-2008, 10:39 AM

That brings up another thought... Graham is actually a pretty good creator.. He just never gets the minutes.

You are right, and unless Shawne and Quis are traded all he's going to be seeing mostly DNP sitting in a suit at the end of the bench. IMO, that will be a terrible shame. When he got the minutes last year, he showed he could produce.

McKeyFan

06-30-2008, 11:56 AM

Go-to guy? Nah. We're going to play team basketball. The other teams are not going to know who will get the call at crunch time. The "creating" is going to happen in the huddle during the time-out -- not on the floor with the clock ticking away.

Man, that sounds great. I really do prefer that option. Very difficult. Lots of hard work. Great coaching. Do we have the stuff?

Anthem

06-30-2008, 12:13 PM

If things go our way, I think Danny and Brandon will be our creators.
Really? I thought the skinny on Brandon was that he'd be ideal in an off-ball, get-shots-in-the-offense-but-don't-create-from-nothing role.

joeshmoe

06-30-2008, 12:22 PM

Mike and Danny are the only guys on this team who can get 15+ a night. .....

..TJ will create for others but he won't score a lot himself. We need a third scorer on this team and it has to be a big man.

TJ won't score a whole lot of points, but in Jimmy's offense playing 30-35 minutes a game he will eclipse 15 pts a game. He averaged 12 points last season in 25 minutes. My conservative expectations for TJ are 16 pts 8 assists in 30-35 minutes of action.

So, that is about 55 pts from your starting back court.

Speed

06-30-2008, 12:27 PM

Most teams prefer to iso down the stretch, which frankly baffles me in most cases. I always liked how the Pacers would run a play for Reggie (mostly) or someone else (occasionally) to get them a good look, rather than just give them the ball and say "Go get 'em."

Yep, there wasn't a go to player on those Reggie teams. Jalen could hit a shot, but it was Reggie come off several screens. It seems like you need those players watching Kobe and Lebron, but its not a have to have.

Speed

06-30-2008, 12:28 PM

TJ won't score a whole lot of points, but in Jimmy's offense playing 30-35 minutes a game he will eclipse 15 pts a game. He averaged 12 points last season in 25 minutes. My conservative expectations for TJ are 16 pts 8 assists in 30-35 minutes of action.

So, that is about 55 pts from your starting back court.

I worry about him playing that much, I would hope it would be 27 mins TJ, 21 mins Jack.

Trader Joe

06-30-2008, 12:29 PM

We actually had a "go-to guy who can create."

For about an hour.

You have an odd definition of go-to guy.

joeshmoe

06-30-2008, 12:34 PM

I worry about him playing that much, I would hope it would be 27 mins TJ, 21 mins Jack.

Not to get off subject, but why do you worry about him playing that much? There will always be a risk of injury with TJ, but I don't think you limit his minutes for that reason.

Rajah Brown

06-30-2008, 02:23 PM

Anthem-

You are correct sir. Rush has a long way to go just to be able to
go either direction effectively off the bounce, let alone create for
looks for others (aside from his perimeter range creating 'space'
in general).

But hey, it's the season of wishful thinking and imaginative
extrapolation.

Taterhead

06-30-2008, 10:24 PM

You have an odd definition of go-to guy.

Why? He can beat his man off the bounce and get a good shot for himself or someone else?

I think that is #1 requirement a "go to guy".

Trader Joe

06-30-2008, 10:28 PM

Why? He can beat his man off the bounce and get a good shot for himself or someone else?

I think that is #1 requirement a "go to guy".

Thats a gross over simplification of what a go to guy is.
Technically Marquis Daniels is a go to guy based off your definition, so is Jamaal Tinsley.

McKeyFan

06-30-2008, 10:46 PM

Technically Marquis Daniels is a go to guy based off your definition, so is Jamaal Tinsley.

Actually, those two guys were the best go to guys on our team last year.

They just weren't that good at it.

Trader Joe

06-30-2008, 10:47 PM

Actually, those two guys were the best go to guys on our team last year.

They just weren't that good at it.

To me being a go to guy, implies being good at it. So Tins and Quis are not go to guys in any way, shape, or form.

McKeyFan

06-30-2008, 10:52 PM

Semantics, I suppose.

A go to guy can create his own shot and make something happen despite intense defensive coverage. I think Tins and Daniels are able to do that better than anyone else on our team. They just aren't that good at finishing, or hitting an outside jumper.

But they can create a high percentage shot when you need one.

Anthem

06-30-2008, 11:04 PM

To me being a go to guy, implies being good at it. So Tins and Quis are not go to guys in any way, shape, or form.
Honestly, if he's healthy and not forcing it Tinsley's a pretty good go-to guy. He's won quite a few games for us with clutch drives.

Hicks

06-30-2008, 11:22 PM

Honestly, if he's healthy and not forcing it Tinsley's a pretty good go-to guy. He's won quite a few games for us with clutch drives.

Really?

Taterhead

07-01-2008, 05:07 AM

Thats a gross over simplification of what a go to guy is.
Technically Marquis Daniels is a go to guy based off your definition, so is Jamaal Tinsley.

Actually I said that was the #1 requirement, not the only requirement.

McKeyFan

07-01-2008, 07:51 AM

Really?

You don't remember? They were beautiful, very creative drives.

He just didn't make the shot.

:D

Anthem

07-01-2008, 09:57 AM

Really?
Hey, I know we're all sick of Tinsley, and can't think of anything besides that overtime abomination when we think of his attempts at late-game heroics. But he's probably hit more buzzer-beaters than anybody else on the team. When he's in control of himself, he's actually pretty clutch.

Hicks

07-01-2008, 10:11 AM

I just think that is incorrect. I can recall one time he hit a shot like that, and it was from like 15+ feet. I don't recall a time when he attacked the basket for a game-winning layup.

rexnom

07-01-2008, 10:23 AM

I just think that is incorrect. I can recall one time he hit a shot like that, and it was from like 15+ feet. I don't recall a time when he attacked the basket for a game-winning layup.
Game-winner against SA. I'm sure it's on youtube too. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=270401011

One of the great Jamaal Tinsley games (of late). Just a huge game. JO had pretty much given up on the team for the season at that point (probably with good reason). And JT pulled this game out of his ***. We still could have made the playoffs at that point, too.

Hicks

07-01-2008, 10:33 AM

Fair enough. It's not going to make me miss him, though.

rexnom

07-01-2008, 10:39 AM

Fair enough. It's not going to make me miss him, though.
I mean, in the other game against SA that season he had 6pts and 4ast on a classic 2-10 day. I won't miss him either.

Young

07-01-2008, 01:14 PM

TJ won't score a whole lot of points, but in Jimmy's offense playing 30-35 minutes a game he will eclipse 15 pts a game. He averaged 12 points last season in 25 minutes. My conservative expectations for TJ are 16 pts 8 assists in 30-35 minutes of action.

So, that is about 55 pts from your starting back court.

Well this may be true that Ford gets around 15 or so a game. I still don't think of Ford as a scoring opition.

If Ford does score his share of points then great but with our roster right now he is probably the third opition out of the starting 5 assuming we go with Ford, Dunleavy, Danny, Jeff, and Troy. I think for us we need to get another scorer in there. Maybe Shawne can be that player but right now he isn't or hasn't proven he is.

naptownmenace

07-01-2008, 01:58 PM

Danny developed into that player by the end of the season. He either got a good shot for us or he got to the free throw line. That coincidentally was about the time that we starting winning games.

He's a known commodity now and will get the benefit of the refs more. He's definitely ready to be our full-time go-to-guy.

McKeyFan

07-01-2008, 03:51 PM

He's definitely ready to be our full-time go-to-guy.

Except he doesn't really have any moves.

Hicks

07-01-2008, 03:54 PM

Except he doesn't really have any moves.

So then did he mystically drop 30-point games multiple times as we fought for a playoff spot? That wasn't an accident. I'm not saying he'll average anything near 30, but he was balling at the end of the year.

McKeyFan

07-01-2008, 04:23 PM

So then did he mystically drop 30-point games multiple times as we fought for a playoff spot? That wasn't an accident. I'm not saying he'll average anything near 30, but he was balling at the end of the year.

He's become deadly from the three point line. Or, he can fake the three and drive to the basket and finish strong or get fouled. Great athlete.

But he can't do much in between.

Hicks

07-01-2008, 04:39 PM

He's become deadly from the three point line. Or, he can fake the three and drive to the basket and finish strong or get fouled. Great athlete.

But he can't do much in between.

Well, that ain't bad in and of itself, but being able to shoot 3's and drive and get fouled will open up the middle for him to learn to pull up and nail 15 footers.

DgR

07-01-2008, 05:41 PM

I know i can get lynched for thinking it- but thanks to us having some decent screen setters Quis could become a very effective Rip type player. He could really help our offense.

please note I wrote "type" player- not that Quis could become as good as Rip. Not in a million years